Research in Motion appealed the International Trade Commission’s determination that it infringed a patent on cameraphones held by Kodak, according to a Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketing notice. In its investigation of certain mobile telephones and wireless communication devices featuring digital cameras and components thereof (337-TA-703), the ITC found that RIM infringed the patent at issue, but found no violation of Section 337 because of the patent’s obviousness. Kodak also filed an appeal Aug. 7.
The characteristics of delivered merchandise, rather than the characteristics of merchandise as ordered, govern interpretations of whether the merchandise falls within the scope of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, said the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in reversing an International Trade Administration AD/CV scope determination on stainless steel plate in coils, which had been affirmed by the Court of International Trade.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit adopted changes to its Appellate Mediation Program Guidelines regarding: (1) confidentiality; and (2) settlements that include terms concerning vacatur of a district court ruling. Changes are as follows:
The Court of Appeals’ decision in Hitachi Home Electronics (America), Inc. v. United States “not only deprives importers of timely review of protests, but also allows Customs to block their access to judicial review,” said the American Association of Exporters and Importers (AAEI) in an amicus brief in support of Hitachi’s request for a Supreme Court hearing. Hitachi is appealing the October 2011 ruling of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the statute does not require CBP to decide customs protests within two years, even though 19 USC 1515(a) says it “shall” do so.
Circuit Judge Richard Lynn of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit announced his retirement from regular active service on CAFC on Nov. 1, and will assume senior status. Linn was on the CAFC for more than 12 years.
InterDigital appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an International Trade Commission determination to terminate the Section 337 patent investigation of certain wireless devices with 3G capabilities and components thereof (337-TA-800) with respect to respondent LG. The ITC’s investigation is still pending, and completion is targeted for June 28, 2013. The ITC terminated the investigation with respect to LG on July 6 based on an arbitration clause in a license agreement, despite InterDigital’s opposition.
Hubbell Inc. filed an appeal of the International Trade Commission’s ruling in the section 337 patent investigation of certain ground fault circuit interrupters and products containing same, according to documents on the website of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In May, the ITC issued a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders blocking imports of the merchandise at issue. Petitions for review of the ITC determination have also been filed by Leviton Manufacturing Co. (CAFC Docket No. 2012-1483) and by Fujian Hongan Electric Co., Ltd. and Zhejiang Trimone Science & Technology Electric Co., Ltd.(CAFC Docket No. 2012-1493).
Chances are slim that the Hitachi case on time limits for CBP protests will be taken up by the Supreme Court, say industry lawyers, and that is feeding a growing push for a legislative solution. In its decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the statutory two-year period for CBP to decide protests isn’t binding. But the remedy CAFC said is available to importers, accelerated disposition, could hurt smaller importers without the resources to challenge a deemed denial in court, industry lawyers said. Furthermore, CBP itself could face adverse consequences as more importers file for accelerated disposition. As a result, industry groups and customs brokers have begun pushing for amendments to the statute that would hold CBP to a time limit.
The Fresh Garlic Producers Association (FGPA) filed an appeal of the Court of International Trade’s June 11 ruling in Jinxiang Hejia Co. v. United States, according to an Aug. 22 Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketing notice. In the appealed ruling, CIT affirmed the zero AD rate assigned to Chinese plaintiff Jinxiang Heija Co. in the second remand redetermination of a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China (A-570-831). The International Trade Administration originally assigned Jinxiang Hejia an AD rate of 15.37%. At issue in the decision was the ITA’s use of price data when calculating surrogate values.
In section 337 patent cases, the party attempting to establish that a patent is invalid because of prior invention bears the burden of proving the prior invention indeed came first, said the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in reversing part of an International Trade Commission determination. According to CAFC, when the dates of conception or notification of the invention overlap, the tie goes to the complainant in validity determinations in section 337 cases.